Now here’s something I didn’t expect! Almost a month after the General Election, and I’ve received a response to the email I sent to the parliamentary candidates for the constituency I live in. Ah well, better late than never I guess. None of the others have made any response (yet!). I’ve removed his mobile number from his response, as I’m sure he doesn’t want to receive random phone calls from people on the internet, otherwise the rest is a copy and paste operation!

Dear GeraldFirst of all apologies for the delay in getting back to you. I was
overwhelmed with emails in the final days of the campaign and I am only just
managing to catch up. Let me take each of your questions in turn:

“1. Abortion – Would you favour a reduction in the term for “social”
abortions i.e. those done for any reason other than to save the mother’s
life (at present 24 weeks)? Do you oppose late abortions carried out
because of foetal abnormalities?”

With respect to abortion I feel there must be a balance between protection
of the rights of the unborn and the mother. I appreciate that new
scientific knowledge is challenging current time-limits and would consider
the latest information as and when I found myself making a decision in
parliament. I appreciate that this may seem a little like avoiding giving
you a straight answer, but it is not an area I make any claim to be expert
on. Hence I would explore it in depth at the time and read up on the latest
advice from a range of experts.

On late abortions carried out because of foetal abnormalities it rather
depends how late you are talking. Generally though I think it is something
that the parents are best deciding, with advice from physicians, rather than
the state.

“2. Embryo research – Are you opposed to the use of human embryos for a)
cloning; b) choosing a child’s gender; c) chimeras (human cells blended
with cells of other species; d) hybrids (human cells implanted in other
animals; e) gathering stem cells?”

“3. Assisted suicide – Would you oppose any move to make assisted suicide
easier (no longer an offence)?”

This issue was first raised with me when I visited the Convent Care Home in
the Butts, Brentford. As I explained at the time, my view is that today, if
people can afford it, the reality is that they will go overseas –
Switzerland, for example. Hence the priority must become ensuring that
people of all ages are engaged in depth during their education on this
issue. This will mean they can come to an informed decision on the matter
and appreciate the various perspectives on euthanasia. Personally I can
not honestly say what decision I would come to faced with a terminal illness
and chronic pain. Hence I believe others too should be able to make an
informed choice, with the necessary safeguards in place.

“4. Euthanasia – Do you oppose the provisions of the Mental Capacity Bill
which a) require hospitals to allow patients with little hope of
recovery to die and b) require patients to be deprived of food and water
if they fall into a coma or become too ill to speak for themselves?”

My view is that we should do a better job of ascertaining people’s desires
before they get into such a terrible position. Families, doctors and nurses
can then act upon the person’s own wishes rather than speculating.

“5. Religious hatred – Do you agree that the measure contained in the
Serious Organised Crime Bill restricts freedom of speech, particularly
for Christians?”

Yes I agree that there are elements of the Serious Organised Crime Bill that
restrict freedom of speech and to which I am opposed.

“6. Civil Partnership – Do you agree that this measure weakens the
sanctity of marriage and is misguided?”

No, I do not believe Civil Partnerships weaken the sanctity of marriage. I
believe it presents a formalising of many peoples’ co-habitation
arrangements which for some, may encourage them towards marriage at a later
date. However, crucially I think it can provide children with greater
stability.

“Would you also be willing for your responses to be made known to others?”

Yes. Please include the caveat that these are brief responses and haven’t
gone into any of the nuances/ complexities that I know exist in these
debates.

If you would like me to go into further depth on any of these issues please
do not hesitate to contact me again by email.

Yours sincerely

Andrew Dakers
Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Spokesperson for Brentford & Isleworth

So there you have it. Some interesting responses. If Andrew Dakers decides to stand again in the next election, I shall probably follow up this email closer to the event and cast my vote after a little more consideration.